 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / July 2009Why do Americans say...
"in and of itself" when most everyone else says "in itself" "The reason is is that..." when most everyone else says "the reason is that..." "take it off of the table" when most everyone else says "take it off the table" "anesthesiologist" when most everyone else says "anesthetist" "lay" when most everyone else says "lie" "pounds of thrust" when most everyone else says "kilopascals" or "Newtons" and, while I'm at it, why do most people say "kilowatt-hours" when the logical unit is "megajoules" :-)) > "in and of itself" when most everyone else says "in itself" > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > :-)) Just because.  Signature³Don't water it down! You always water it down! Well, don't! Just don't!² - Mary Albinson > "in and of itself" when most everyone else says "in itself" That phrasing covers both "necessary" and "sufficient". > "The reason is is that..." when most everyone else says "the reason is > that..." Never heard anyone double the "is". > "take it off of the table" when most everyone else says "take it off > the table" Ever heard someone say "take it off"? Think stripper. > "anesthesiologist" when most everyone else says "anesthetist" The first is an MD; the second may not be an MD, quite possibly a nurse. > "lay" when most everyone else says "lie" Because the speaker does not know the difference. Do you? "Lay" is a transitive verb; "lie" is an intransitive verb. > "pounds of thrust" when most everyone else says "kilopascals" or > "Newtons" Because Americans build the best rockets. > and, while I'm at it, > why do most people say "kilowatt-hours" when the logical unit is > "megajoules" Because the electrical usage of appliances is usually rated in watts. GFH In message <9532fb61-181b-4ac5-9060-f17f15afc604@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, GFH <georgeh@ankerstein.org> writes >> "in and of itself" when most everyone else says "in itself" > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> "take it off of the table" when most everyone else says "take it off >> the table" Unfortunately, lots of Britons say "of off". It's maybe a regional thing (I've heard it in Luton), and usually pronounced "orf ov" (but not in a posh way). >Ever heard someone say "take it off"? Think stripper. Where I go, the shout "Get 'em off!" >> "anesthesiologist" when most everyone else says "anesthetist" l can hardly pronounce "anesthetist" (sic) let alone "anesthesiologist", and certainly can't spell either any better than you can! [At least in BrE] But my spell-checker can. >The first is an MD; the second may not be an MD, quite possibly >a nurse. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Because the speaker does not know the difference. Do you? >"Lay" is a transitive verb; "lie" is an intransitive verb. Again, Lots of Brits say "lie" when they mean "lay" (even the BBC). >> "pounds of thrust" when most everyone else says "kilopascals" or >> "Newtons" [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Because the electrical usage of appliances is usually rated in >watts. No. That's the rate of usage. But a kWh is a much-more practical unit than a joule. SignatureIan >> "in and of itself" when most everyone else says "in itself" Why do you use "most everyone else" when almost everyone uses "almost everyone else"? >That phrasing covers both "necessary" and "sufficient". Really? That's good. >> "The reason is is that..." when most everyone else says "the reason is >> that..." > > Never heard anyone double the "is". It's pretty common and I'm pretty sure there is a logical origin for it, maybe even that it's correct in some of those cases, because the part following the first "is" is a clause in inverted order in some way. I've meant to start about a thread about this but I haven't rememmbered to write down exactly what is said. I think it is correctly used only 5 or 10 percent of the time, if at all. Why do so many people say, "The reason is because..."? "The reason they're so short is because they don't eat food as nutritious as they might" should be "The reason they're so short is that they don't eat food...." OR "They are so short because they don't eat food... " It only takes a one or two word change to get it right. I didn't notice this until about 28 years ago, a teenage friend asked me to read her homework assignment. I'd probably heard it before, without noticing, but it stuck out like a sore thumb when I read it. >> "take it off of the table" when most everyone else says "take it off >> the table" > >Ever heard someone say "take it off"? Think stripper. In parliamentary procedure "lay it on the table" and iirc "take it off the table" are still used. In fact "take it off the table is used a lot in American. Maybe half the time. "Off of the table" is popular too. >> "anesthesiologist" when most everyone else says "anesthetist" > >The first is an MD; the second may not be an MD, quite possibly >a nurse. In the US at least. How do they distinguish this in other English-speaking countries? >> "lay" when most everyone else says "lie" > >Because the speaker does not know the difference. Yes. >Do you? >"Lay" is a transitive verb; "lie" is an intransitive verb. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Because Americans build the best rockets. Yes. And I would never want to cause harm to Pascal. Newtons are cookies. >> and, while I'm at it, > >> why do most people say "kilowatt-hours" when the logical unit is >> "megajoules" Do they use this anywhere? England? Or even France? Do they rate lightbulbs in metric? I'm not counting lumens, which afaik are not metric, even though one may have 10 of them, if he keeps them in a safe place. >Because the electrical usage of appliances is usually rated in >watts. Yes. One amp at one volt. What could be simpler. >GFH SignaturePosters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I have lived in Western Pa. 10 years Indianapolis 10 years Chicago 6 years Brooklyn, NY 12 years Baltimore 26 years >>> "in and of itself" when most everyone else says "in itself" > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > rememmbered to write down exactly what is said. I think it is > correctly used only 5 or 10 percent of the time, if at all. What it was was football. Football is what it was. What it was, if I am recalling it correctly after lo, these many years, is football. It all depends on what "is" is. >>> Never heard anyone double the "is". >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >am recalling it correctly after lo, these many years, is football. >It all depends on what "is" is. That's an example, but I had in mind one where the is want' in quotes and had no reason to be. Where both instances of is were acting as verbs. Like I say, I was never able to get the exact wording and check it out. SignaturePosters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I have lived in Western Pa. 10 years Indianapolis 10 years Chicago 6 years Brooklyn, NY 12 years Baltimore 26 years >>> why do most people say "kilowatt-hours" when the logical unit is >>> "megajoules" [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Yes. One amp at one volt. What could be simpler. Or, one watt is one joule per second. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * > >>> why do most people say "kilowatt-hours" when the logical unit is > >>> "megajoules" > >>Because the electrical usage of appliances is usually rated in > >>watts. > >Yes. One amp at one volt. What could be simpler. > Or, one watt is one joule per second. More to the point, though, we don't usually count off time in intervals of 16 minutes and 40 seconds. ¬R > >> why do most people say "kilowatt-hours" when the logical unit is > >> "megajoules" > > Do they use this anywhere? England? Or even France? Do they rate > lightbulbs in metric? I'm not counting lumens, which afaik are not > metric A lumen is a metric measure of light output (more or less) as opposed to joules which is a measure of total energy. A joule per second is a watt. (It is also other things. For example, a measure of the work done when a force of 1 newton acts through one metre.) > , even though one may have 10 of them, if he keeps them in a > safe place. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Yes. One amp at one volt. What could be simpler. But my complaint is not about watts (rate of energy consumption) but about total energy. Kilowatt-hours is like asking "how far is it from A to B?" "Oh about three 100 km/h hours." (300 km) "How much energy did that appliance use to do the job?" "Oh, about three kilowatt-hours" (3 kilojoule/second-hours = 10.8 megajoules) I even heard the Discovery channel tell us that a particular hydro-electric dam outputs twenty kilowatt-hours a year. A nonsense statement. My critics who defend kilowatt-hours are doing so, I'm sure, out of familiarity alone. We don't use joules so we're unfamiliar with them. But scientists use the word and would see nothing wrong in my objection. Same with Newtons and pascals. >> >> why do most people say "kilowatt-hours" when the logical unit is >> >> "megajoules" [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >watt. (It is also other things. For example, a measure of the work done >when a force of 1 newton acts through one metre.) A watt is a newton-meter/per second. A watt is a unit of power, the newton-meter is a unit of energy or work. [...] >I even heard the Discovery channel tell us that a particular >hydro-electric dam outputs twenty kilowatt-hours a year. A nonsense >statement. It sounds awfully small for a hydroelectric plant (megawatt-hours might be more reasonable, but it is technically correct. That would be the total energy produced by the dam, expressed as kilowatt-hours, in one year. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * > > >> why do most people say "kilowatt-hours" when the logical unit is > > >> "megajoules" <snip> > Kilowatt-hours is like asking "how far is it from A to B?" > > "Oh about three 100 km/h hours." (300 km) As a matter of fact, people describe distances in units of time quite often -- which one can take to have an implied speed multiplier, according to their mode of transport, leading to an interpretation very like the above. It's not uncommon for the speed to be hinted at: "The corner store is ten minutes away, five if you run," or "I'm three hours from Calgary, assuming I'm not leaving or arriving during rush hour." > "How much energy did that appliance use to do the job?" > > "Oh, about three kilowatt-hours" (3 kilojoule/second-hours = 10.8 > megajoules) In general, as a matter of practical convenience, it isn't always useful to reduce units to the greatest extent possible. Take pressure measurements, for example: since 1 Pa = 1 N.m^(-2) and 1 N = 1 kg.m.s^(-2), 1 Pa = 1 kg.m^(-1).s^(-2). Dimensionally correct though this may be, you won't see anyone talking -- or even thinking -- about pressure in terms of kilograms per metre per second per second (or pounds (mass) per foot per second per second), because those forms don't correspond to the units of the inputs to any real-world problem involving pressure. You probably don't care much for measuring electric charge in amp-hours instead of coulombs, but those who do find it more convenient in much the same circumstances as they might choose to use (kilo)watt-hours over (mega)joules. OTOSOTC, in these parts natural gas is sold by the GJ rather than by volume, or perhaps mass, as would seem more logical. SignatureOdysseus >My critics who defend kilowatt-hours are doing so, I'm sure, out of >familiarity alone. We don't use joules so we're unfamiliar with them. >But scientists use the word and would see nothing wrong in my >objection. Same with Newtons and pascals. In many jurisdications, it is illegal to provide energy bills that fail to quote kWh. If the handful of businesses and legislators had permitted energy bills in joules only rather than mandating kWh, people would get used to it. Similarly, in the US legal jurisdiction it is illegal to provide a supermarket package in metric units only (for most but not all packs). If the handful of legislators permitted the sale of packages with metric units only, people would get used to it. >>My critics who defend kilowatt-hours are doing so, I'm sure, out of >>familiarity alone. We don't use joules so we're unfamiliar with them. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >If the handful of legislators permitted the sale of packages with >metric units only, people would get used to it. Have you got any citations on these laws? Are they state or federal? Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>In many jurisdications, it is illegal to provide energy bills that >>fail to quote kWh. >>Similarly, in the US legal jurisdiction it is illegal to provide a >>supermarket package in metric units only (for most but not all packs). >Have you got any citations on these laws? Are they state or >federal? Mandatory use of kWh. ------------------------ Example from the European Union (it may be similar in other metric countries): http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32007D0394:EN:NOT "Prices must be expressed in national currency per kWh" Mandatory use of non-metric units. ------------------------ Example from US Federal law (FPLA) relating to most supermarket packs: http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fpla/outline.html "measurement must be in both metric and inch/pound units" Example from US Federal law (FPLA) relating to labels on beer bottles: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&rgn=div5&view=text&node=27: 1.0.1.1.5&idno=27 "(a) Net contents shall be stated as follows: (1) If less than 1 pint, in fluid ounces, or fractions of a pint." Example from US Federal law (FPLA) relating to labels on cosmetics: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr;sid=001e3b3b490b18105e0c279 f0c0cbcc5;rgn=div6;view=text;node=21%3A7.0.1.2.11.2;idno=21;cc=ecfr "Statements of weight shall be in terms of avoirdupois pound and ounce. Statements of fluid measure shall be in terms of the U.S. gallon of 231 cubic inches and quart, pint, and fluid-ounce subdivisions thereof and shall express the volume at 68 °F. (20 °C.)." Almost all US States permit (or are considering permitting) metric- only labels in line with the 'UPLR'. US Federal government has discussed changes to the FPLA to end the ban on metric-only packages but it is a slow process. More details on the US Dept of Commerce (NIST) website at: http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasures/Metric/trade-comm.cfm#pl > Never heard anyone double the "is". I don't think you've been listening. It's a very common case of changing horses in midstream. "The reason is" gets mixed up halfway through with noun-clause constructions like "Why that is, is" and adjective-clause constructions like "The reason that is, is," and out comes "The reason is, is" instead of any of them. ¬R In article <9532fb61-181b-4ac5-9060-f17f15afc604@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, GFH <georgeh@ankerstein.org> wrote: > > "The reason is is that..." when most everyone else says "the reason is > > that..." > > Never heard anyone double the "is". Please listen closely. It's as common as hell these days. > > "lay" when most everyone else says "lie" > > Because the speaker does not know the difference. Do you? Sure. > "pounds of thrust" when most everyone else says "kilopascals" or > "Newtons" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > why do most people say "kilowatt-hours" when the logical unit is > "megajoules" Because we don't use the metric system for everyday measurements. Yes, metric is a more-logical system, but we all grew up with our current system (the name of which I don't recall right now) and don't want to go through the trauma of converting. I learned metric in my high-school and college classes and can compute in it. I know many of the conversions between the systems by memory (2.54 cm equals 1 inch, a meter is 39.37 inches or about 1.1 yards, a kilogram is about 2.2 pounds, a liter is about 1.06 quarts, 1 mile is about 1.6 kilometers, etc.) But I can't visualize a measurement given in metric. I have to convert it before I have a sense of how big it is. How far is 1000 km? I don't know until I convert it to about 620 miles. I have a feel for how far 620 miles is. I doubt that the U.S. public will ever convert unless it is forced upon us. That many of us use "lay" when we mean "lie" bothers me, too. Or "between you and I". Or lots of other misusages. Except for the ones I use, of course. :-) Bill in Kentucky ---------------------------------------------------------------- Reverse parts of the user name and ISP name for my e-address > metric is a more-logical system, if you write COBOL for financial institutions. Apart from money, we deal with halves and thirds of things more often than tenths. When was the last time you sliced a pizza in 5 or 10? > but we all grew up with our current > system (the name of which I don't recall right now) English. Meanwhile, the English grew up with crazy units like stone and guineas involving factors of 7. (Well, OK, so did my dairy-farming cousins, who still have to deal in hundredweight.) ¬R a bunch of things I don't find particularly American except for: > "anesthesiologist" when most everyone else says "anesthetist" That one has to do with licensing. An anesthetist may be a nurse or other assisting practitioner. An anesthesiologist is a physician qualified in the specialty of anesthesiology. You probably don't want one who's not the other when you're undergoing major anesthesia. ¬R |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.